Curt Doolittle

Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • PSYCHOLOGY IS A PSEUDOSCIENCE – A PHILOSOPHY GRADUALLY OVERCOMING 150 YEARS OF O

    PSYCHOLOGY IS A PSEUDOSCIENCE – A PHILOSOPHY GRADUALLY OVERCOMING 150 YEARS OF OUTRIGHT NONSENSE.

    HERE IS THE ALTERNATIVE.

    1 – if you get mises and hoppe’s property rights analysis, and just add property-in -toto, so that you end up with acquisitionism.

    2 – If you then take the cognitive biases you see how evolution fucked with us to keep us taking risks (acting, exploring) within our energy limits.

    3 – Then take five factors, then ten dimensions of personality.

    4 – Then take those factors and map them to phases of the prey drive on y axis, and male vs female reproductive strategies on the x-axis, and you have all of psychology.

    5 – Then take haidt’s moral categories and express them as property rights, and you have all of political psychology and sociology.

    6 – Then all you have is reciprocity > individual violations of reciprocity > gender violations of reciprocity > class and group violations of reciprocity > and group evolutionary violations of reciprocity, and you have all of politics.

    In other words, we can cooperate honestly on one hand, and we can game each other on the other, and we can game each other at every scale from the individual to the nation.

    I mean, really, it’s all that simple. That’s the boring science of it. We are very obvious gene machines that create fictions in order to cooperate while maintaining the optimum level of cheating possible within the available limits of cooperation.

    Psychology either takes that scientific position, or it takes a fictionalist position. Most of us want a fictionalist position when we are young so that we can ‘feel’. Some of us want a fictionalist position when we are developing, so that we can strategize for an advantage. Some of us who mature want a justification of our strategy to provide positive feedback for our immoral successes, or our personal weakness and failings. Some people don’t fictionalize at all, they just compete without doing harm. They are the defacto natural elite.

    The Truth is very simple. But the number of fictions we have invented to complicate what is very obviously the rational actions of a selfish animal in competition with other superpredators – and thereby obscure our hierarchy of immoralities.

    But such fictions allow us to form coalitions of people with the same immoralities (systems of parasitism). Just as much as the truth would allow us to form coalitions of people with no immoralities and no parasitisms.

    The difference is very simple: only a superior people would choose Sovereignty, reciprocity, truth(empiricism, operationalism), and markets in everything – because only a superior people can compete by sovereign, reciprocal, truthful, trusting, and market-competitive means.

    And only inferior people would choose an alternative.

    Hence the few use truth and markets and the many use fictionalisms. Because there are so few who are superior to the mass of humanity.

    And very few men are of sufficient agency to acknowledge these truths.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-02-28 13:09:00 UTC

  • Psychology, Sociology, Politics, Group Evolutionary Strategy Are Trivially Simple.

    But it takes a great deal of Agency (evolutionary advancement) to accept (Tolerate and avoid fictionalisms) that simplicity. Honestly. 1 – if you get mises and hoppe’s property rights analysis, and just add property-in -toto, so that you end up with acquisitionism. 2 – If you then take the cognitive biases you see how evolution fucked with us to keep us taking risks (acting, exploring) within our energy limits. 3 – Then take five factors, then ten dimensions of personality. 4 – Then take those factors and map them to phases of the prey drive on y axis, and male vs female reproductive strategies on the x-axis, and you have all of psychology. 5 – Then take haidt’s moral categories and express them as property rights, and you have all of political psychology and sociology. 6 – Then all you have is reciprocity > individual violations of reciprocity > gender violations of reciprocity > class and group violations of reciprocity > and group evolutionary violations of reciprocity, and you have all of politics. In other words, we can cooperate honestly on one hand, and we can game each other on the other, and we can game each other at every scale from the individual to the nation. I mean, really, it’s all that simple. That’s the boring science of it. We are very obvious gene machines that create fictions in order to cooperate while maintaining the optimum level of cheating possible within the available limits of cooperation. Psychology either takes that scientific position, or it takes a fictionalist position. Most of us want a fictionalist position when we are young so that we can ‘feel’. Some of us want a fictionalist position when we are developing, so that we can strategize for an advantage. Some of us who mature want a justification of our strategy to provide positive feedback for our immoral successes, or our personal weakness and failings. Some people don’t fictionalize at all, they just compete without doing harm. They are the defacto natural elite. The Truth is very simple. But the number of fictions we have invented to complicate what is very obviously the rational actions of a selfish animal in competition with other superpredators – and thereby obscure our hierarchy of immoralities. But such fictions allow us to form coalitions of people with the same immoralities (systems of parasitism). Just as much as the truth would allow us to form coalitions of people with no immoralities and no parasitisms. The difference is very simple: only a superior people would choose Sovereignty, reciprocity, truth(empiricism, operationalism), and markets in everything – because only a superior people can compete by sovereign, reciprocal, truthful, trusting, and market-competitive means. And only inferior people would choose an alternative. Hence the few use truth and markets and the many use fictionalisms. Because there are so few who are superior to the mass of humanity. And very few men are of sufficient agency to acknowledge these truths.

  • Psychology, Sociology, Politics, Group Evolutionary Strategy Are Trivially Simple.

    But it takes a great deal of Agency (evolutionary advancement) to accept (Tolerate and avoid fictionalisms) that simplicity. Honestly. 1 – if you get mises and hoppe’s property rights analysis, and just add property-in -toto, so that you end up with acquisitionism. 2 – If you then take the cognitive biases you see how evolution fucked with us to keep us taking risks (acting, exploring) within our energy limits. 3 – Then take five factors, then ten dimensions of personality. 4 – Then take those factors and map them to phases of the prey drive on y axis, and male vs female reproductive strategies on the x-axis, and you have all of psychology. 5 – Then take haidt’s moral categories and express them as property rights, and you have all of political psychology and sociology. 6 – Then all you have is reciprocity > individual violations of reciprocity > gender violations of reciprocity > class and group violations of reciprocity > and group evolutionary violations of reciprocity, and you have all of politics. In other words, we can cooperate honestly on one hand, and we can game each other on the other, and we can game each other at every scale from the individual to the nation. I mean, really, it’s all that simple. That’s the boring science of it. We are very obvious gene machines that create fictions in order to cooperate while maintaining the optimum level of cheating possible within the available limits of cooperation. Psychology either takes that scientific position, or it takes a fictionalist position. Most of us want a fictionalist position when we are young so that we can ‘feel’. Some of us want a fictionalist position when we are developing, so that we can strategize for an advantage. Some of us who mature want a justification of our strategy to provide positive feedback for our immoral successes, or our personal weakness and failings. Some people don’t fictionalize at all, they just compete without doing harm. They are the defacto natural elite. The Truth is very simple. But the number of fictions we have invented to complicate what is very obviously the rational actions of a selfish animal in competition with other superpredators – and thereby obscure our hierarchy of immoralities. But such fictions allow us to form coalitions of people with the same immoralities (systems of parasitism). Just as much as the truth would allow us to form coalitions of people with no immoralities and no parasitisms. The difference is very simple: only a superior people would choose Sovereignty, reciprocity, truth(empiricism, operationalism), and markets in everything – because only a superior people can compete by sovereign, reciprocal, truthful, trusting, and market-competitive means. And only inferior people would choose an alternative. Hence the few use truth and markets and the many use fictionalisms. Because there are so few who are superior to the mass of humanity. And very few men are of sufficient agency to acknowledge these truths.

  • PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIOLOGY, POLITICS, GROUP EVOLUTIONARY STRATEGY ARE TRIVIALLY SIMPL

    PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIOLOGY, POLITICS, GROUP EVOLUTIONARY STRATEGY ARE TRIVIALLY SIMPLE.

    But it takes a great deal of Agency (evolutionary advancement) to accept (Tolerate and avoid fictionalisms) that simplicity.

    Honestly.

    1 – if you get mises and hoppe’s property rights analysis, and just add property-in -toto, so that you end up with acquisitionism.

    2 – If you then take the cognitive biases you see how evolution fucked with us to keep us taking risks (acting, exploring) within our energy limits.

    3 – Then take five factors, then ten dimensions of personality.

    4 – Then take those factors and map them to phases of the prey drive on y axis, and male vs female reproductive strategies on the x-axis, and you have all of psychology.

    5 – Then take haidt’s moral categories and express them as property rights, and you have all of political psychology and sociology.

    6 – Then all you have is reciprocity > individual violations of reciprocity > gender violations of reciprocity > class and group violations of reciprocity > and group evolutionary violations of reciprocity, and you have all of politics.

    In other words, we can cooperate honestly on one hand, and we can game each other on the other, and we can game each other at every scale from the individual to the nation.

    I mean, really, it’s all that simple. That’s the boring science of it. We are very obvious gene machines that create fictions in order to cooperate while maintaining the optimum level of cheating possible within the available limits of cooperation.

    Psychology either takes that scientific position, or it takes a fictionalist position. Most of us want a fictionalist position when we are young so that we can ‘feel’. Some of us want a fictionalist position when we are developing, so that we can strategize for an advantage. Some of us who mature want a justification of our strategy to provide positive feedback for our immoral successes, or our personal weakness and failings. Some people don’t fictionalize at all, they just compete without doing harm. They are the defacto natural elite.

    The Truth is very simple. But the number of fictions we have invented to complicate what is very obviously the rational actions of a selfish animal in competition with other superpredators – and thereby obscure our hierarchy of immoralities.

    But such fictions allow us to form coalitions of people with the same immoralities (systems of parasitism). Just as much as the truth would allow us to form coalitions of people with no immoralities and no parasitisms.

    The difference is very simple: only a superior people would choose Sovereignty, reciprocity, truth(empiricism, operationalism), and markets in everything – because only a superior people can compete by sovereign, reciprocal, truthful, trusting, and market-competitive means.

    And only inferior people would choose an alternative.

    Hence the few use truth and markets and the many use fictionalisms. Because there are so few who are superior to the mass of humanity.

    And very few men are of sufficient agency to acknowledge these truths.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-02-28 10:53:00 UTC

  • My answer to Is it better for a woman to have an IQ of 140 or above and be avera

    My answer to Is it better for a woman to have an IQ of 140 or above and be average looking or less, or to have an e… https://www.quora.com/Is-it-better-for-a-woman-to-have-an-IQ-of-140-or-above-and-be-average-looking-or-less-or-to-have-an-exceptional-physical-beauty-that-defies-age-with-an-IQ-of-100/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=d4283e13

    Source date (UTC): 2018-02-28 02:33:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/968675547390840834

  • What’s The Hardest Thing You’ve Ever Had To Do?

    —-”What do you think is the hardest thing to do?”—-

    To tolerate the vox populi’s universal Dunning Kruger confidence, moral indignation, and righteousness. Everything else is just a matter of doing a bit of time and effort.

    https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-hardest-thing-youve-ever-had-to-do

  • What’s The Hardest Thing You’ve Ever Had To Do?

    —-”What do you think is the hardest thing to do?”—-

    To tolerate the vox populi’s universal Dunning Kruger confidence, moral indignation, and righteousness. Everything else is just a matter of doing a bit of time and effort.

    https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-hardest-thing-youve-ever-had-to-do

  • Animals capable of cooperation and communication evolve a heavy preference for g

    Animals capable of cooperation and communication evolve a heavy preference for gossip as a means of creating equality by preventing advantage. The problem is, equality is to the group’s competitive disadvantage. The Question is how to enable elites to compete for the group.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-02-27 17:50:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/968543810702790657

    Reply addressees: @TheStoicEmperor

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/967962344805474305

    IN REPLY TO:

    @TheStoicEmperor

    Almost all Americans own a smartphone or a computer.

    Each device contains the library of Alexandria.

    The sum total of all world knowledge.

    You can learn anything. Why don’t you?

    Too busy tracking social status.

    Too enthralled by imagery your evolution can’t resist.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/967962344805474305

  • Animals capable of cooperation and communication evolve a heavy preference for g

    Animals capable of cooperation and communication evolve a heavy preference for gossip as a means of creating equality by preventing advantage in-group. The problem is, in-group equality is to the group’s competitive disadvantage. The Question instead, is how to enable elites to compete for the group. Western civ solved this through heroism and market rotations regardless of impact on the hierarchy.

  • Animals capable of cooperation and communication evolve a heavy preference for g

    Animals capable of cooperation and communication evolve a heavy preference for gossip as a means of creating equality by preventing advantage in-group. The problem is, in-group equality is to the group’s competitive disadvantage. The Question instead, is how to enable elites to compete for the group. Western civ solved this through heroism and market rotations regardless of impact on the hierarchy.